Alpert v. Resolution Trust Corp.

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that “when the doctor’s opinion testimony extends beyond the facts disclosed during care and treatment of the patient and the doctor is specifically retained to develop opinion testimony, he or she is subject to the provisions of Rule 26”
• treating physician may offer testimony within the scope of Fed.R.Evid. 702 even though not subject to Rule 26(a)(2)(B) disclosure requirements
• “As a general rule, a treating physician considers not just the plaintiff's diagnosis and prognosis, but also the cause of the plaintiff's injuries”
• “The relevant question is whether these treating physicians acquired their opinions ... directly through their treatment of the plaintiff.”
• issues of diagnosis, prognosis and causation are matters considered within the normal scope of the patient’s care and treatment
• “whether the injuries for which [the physician] treated the plaintiff can be causally related to the accident would appear to be within the scope of the patient’s care and treatment”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).